Three Waters: Wrong answer to right question – Kaipara Mayor in wake of working group participation

Anti-Three Waters signage on a property at Otaika, Whangārei, shows what some think of the controversial Government plan.

10th March 2022

A Northland local government leader says his participation in the Government’s latest efforts to address major national concerns around Three Waters representation, governance and accountability have done nothing to quell his fears.

Kaipara Mayor Dr Jason Smith said after being part of the new working group set up by the Government, he still has concerns for New Zealand’s democracy.

Smith, Northland Mayoral Forum chairman, was a member of the Government working group tasked with addressing Three Waters restructure sticking points for local government around future representation, governance and accountability.

“I participated in the working group in good faith. There is much that’s good in this journey but at the end it’s become clear to me that while there is a need for some kind of water system reform, this one fails to address the fundamental issue of funding investment in our infrastructure and seeks to adjust governance in a way that limits the ability of all people and communities to engage,” Smith said.

“In light of this I don’t support the direction of the reforms and believe … [they] … are the wrong answer to the right question. At the end of all this journey I’m sad to say these Three Waters reforms get a ‘yeah, nah’ from me.”

Growing local government concern about representation, governance and accountability have seen the unprecedented startup of a new breakaway Communities for Local Democracy (C4LD) group of now 30 of New Zealand’s 67 councils and representing 1.5 million people. KDC, FNDC and WDC are among the C4LD group.

Dr Jason Smith – Kaipara Mayor and government representation, governance and accountability working party member is still unhappy about the proposed Three Waters reforms.

Smith said his working group participation saw him change tack and now join Whangārei District Council (WDC), Far North District Council (FNDC) and Auckland Council in rejecting Three Waters participation.

Three Waters restructuring would see these four councils’ drinking water, wastewater and stormwater functions merged into a giant top-of-New Zealand water services entity currently called entity A.

“I believed the reforms could be an opportunity for mana enhancement for councils and for iwi, that strengthening our democratic institutions is vital. I’m saddened that I believe the output of the working group does not seek to strengthen our democratic institutions or the work those institutions do with and for their people,” Smith said.

Whangārei Mayor Sheryl Mai, who is a member of the C4LD oversight group, said the working group’s recommendations to Government around dealing with the three sticking points of representation, governance and accountability simply made her council more determined in its High Court Three Waters challenge.

Kaipara Lifestyler

15th March 2022


The government’s Three Waters Reform plan to create regional
authorities to remove control from councils has been roundly
rejected by Kaipara Mayor Jason Smith as “bad policy and a
recklessness of the government.”

Dr Smith is the sole Northland member of the working group set up to advise on representation, governance and accountability in the water plan put forward by Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta.
“Being on the working group, I got many new understandings, but regrettably, they sit uncomfortably with me. I now join my fellow mayors of northern New Zealand in not supporting these reforms,” Dr Smith said. “Public systems must be accountable to everyone when they are for everyone. This Three Waters Review has not demonstrated that will be the case. Public engagement and everyone being allowed to participate equally in the creation of plans or ideas is simply good governance. “As a Doctor of Public Policy, I’m reflecting that the Three Waters Reforms are most likely a Trojan Horse for ‘ending the tyranny of the majority’. “Looking at the proposed reform programme in its entirety, including its new recommendations, which have potentially increased the geographic scope away from local broken pipes to every square inch of New Zealand and 12 miles out to sea, these reforms are becoming about something much larger than infrastructure. “I see it as bad policy and a recklessness of the government to allow this situation to develop. ‘Ending the tyranny of the majority’, is potentially a revolutionary development for New Zealand society, as the majority is where the safe seat of society is found, and to up-end that is a
very uncertain path. “Ending the tyranny of the majority could well mean stopping democratic institutions from doing their best for all the people, and I can’t support that. On
behalf of the people I represent — I reject these proposed reforms.” 


9th July 2022

We’re emailing to ask for your support to stand up against the Government’s land grab under the Significant Natural Area (SNA) proposal and the rest of the unworkable regulations in the National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB).

The SNA policy will take control of private land away from its owners if the land meets broad criteria concerning native plants and wildlife.

We’ve made it easy for you to tell the Government to scrap the whole policy and start from scratch.

We know that landowners are the best caretakers of their land. If, as we agree, indigenous biodiversity like our native bush, as well as our native birds and other wildlife, are so important, then the policy in place to protect it should support and empower those best caretakers to do it.

Instead, the SNA land grab will turn the biodiversity on your land into a liability.

For many, their land values will plummet as they are left owning their land, but in name only. Rather than buy the land off you, the Government is just going to make using it illegal.

Urban landowners won’t get off easy either, as the new rules have broad categories that could catch anyone.

Unreasonable bureaucratic box-ticking and the onerous and expensive mapping requirements under the NPSIB won’t do anything practical to advance indigenous biodiversity, while they will divert scarce time and money from the on-the-ground actions that actually improve our environment.

>> Click here to make a submission <<

All this when successful schemes like the QEII National Trust have already shown that working with, rather than against, landowners is the best way to achieve practical and sustainable environmental outcomes.

Your support will dial up the pressure on the Government to scrap this unworkable policy and start from scratch with the sort of approach that Groundswell NZ is advocating.

Our proposal, as part of the Groundswell NZ Integrated Environmental Policy Framework, is to support landowners’ active management of their indigenous biodiversity by:

Treating indigenous biodiversity as an asset, rather than a liability

Rewarding those who protect their natural environment, rather than penalising them

Motivating and empowering landowners to take on-the-ground actions to protect the

biodiversity on their land.

Stand up for workable environmental regulations.

The Government is proposing a new policy to take control of private land away from its owners if the land meets broad criteria concerning native plants and wildlife – and they’ve asked your feedback.

They call this the National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB).

The new rules will penalise most harshly the landowners who have taken care of the native bush and other indigenous life on their land, while creating complex, expensive, and intrusive compliance obligations on everyone.

None of this time and money will be going to supporting the real, on-the-ground actions landowners take to care for their native bush and wildlife.

Indigenous biodiversity will become a liability for all landowners and leaseholders, while millions of dollars are spent on bureaucratic compliance costs.

Urban landowners won’t escape this onslaught of unworkable regulations either, as anyone could be caught by the policy’s broad, sweeping categories.

Instead, Groundswell NZ is proposing a policy that focuses on supporting landowners’ active management of their biodiversity by:

(1) Treating indigenous biodiversity as an asset, rather than a liability

(2) Rewarding those who protect their natural environment, rather than penalising them

(3) Motivating and empowering landowners to take on-the-ground actions to protect the biodiversity on their land

Tell the Government to scrap this policy and adopt the Groundswell approach.


The Ministry for the Environment (MfE) is seeking feedback on the exposure draft of the NPSIB. We’ve made it easy for you to tell them to scrap the policy and adopt the Groundswell approach.

Take two minutes to stand up for workable environmental regulations.

Click to make a Submission :

Dr Muriel Newman
Dr Muriel Newman established the New Zealand Centre for Political Research as a public policy think tank in 2005 after nine years as a Member of Parliament. A former Chamber of Commerce President, her background is in business and education.


Public opinion is turning against Jacinda Ardern and her Government. Recent polls show the trend is now for National to pull ahead of Labour, with the Prime Minister’s popularity continuing to decline.

National will be heartened by their progress. Labour will be looking for answers.

They don’t need to look far. Their unpopular Three Waters policy is back in the news as a result of the publication of a report from the Multi-Party Working Group that was set up by the Government in response to accusations that their consultation with councils was a sham.

While Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta appears resolutely determined to push her water policy through, opposition is growing, as New Zealanders recognise the real purpose of the reform is to gift control of water infrastructure and services to the tribal elite.

Three Waters is an important part of Labour’s radical He Puapua ‘partnership’ agenda to replace New Zealand’s democracy with tribal rule by 2040. This policy blueprint was developed in 2019 but kept hidden from the public until after the 2020 election.

He Puapua is based on the bizarre claim that the Treaty of Waitangi created a 50:50 “partnership” between Maori tribes and Queen Victoria. Not only is it constitutionally impossible for the Crown to enter into a partnership with her subjects, but even former Prime Minister David Lange is described as ridiculing the notion: “He really didn’t believe that Queen Victoria had signed a treaty of equality and partnership with ‘500 thumbprints’.”

The bottom line is that under Labour’s co-governance agenda for tribal control, 50 percent of democratically elected members representing the wider public interest will be replaced by the unelected representatives of multi-million-dollar iwi business development corporations, to represent their interests only – and not be answerable to the wider community. Once iwi have 50 percent of the decision-making power, even though they represent only a minority of New Zealanders, they will collectively have a voting bloc and an effective right of veto – the public will forever be at their mercy.

Since New Zealand’s constitutional conventions require major changes to democratic representation to only be undertaken through widespread consultation and express public approval, it can be argued that because Jacinda Ardern deliberately avoided seeking a public mandate for He Puapua at the 2020 election, the whole tribal control agenda is unconstitutional and illegitimate.  

That means policies designed to replace democratic rights with tribal vetoes, that are part of He Puapua, such as Three Waters and the Pae Ora health reforms, are “ultra vires” and unlawful, since they represent a major constitutional change without the consent of the public.

And that’s a fundamental problem for Three Waters. Furthermore, the Government’s justification for confiscating almost $100 billion of assets from councils is dishonest and does not stand up to scrutiny. Their promised financial benefits projected over 30 years use bogus claims that are unrealistic and based on an assumption that accumulated debt will never need to be repaid, when the real objective is tribal control.

So, not only were New Zealanders deceived by the Government not informing them at the election of their plan to give control of water to muti-million tribal corporations, the PM has still not told Kiwis whether they will be forced to pay iwi a royalty every time they turn on their tap.

Minister Mahuta needs to take responsibility for much of the suspicion and distrust over Three Waters. Along with the Prime Minister, she assured councils the scheme would be voluntary, only to later announce it would be compulsory. She authorised a $3.5 million propaganda campaign of lies, aimed at discrediting councils and deceiving the public by claiming the country’s water quality was so substandard, that only the government could fix it.  

Compounding the problem was the lack of council representation on the 12-member co-governance boards of the four proposed regional water entities, whereby 6 members were to represent up to 23 councils supplying water infrastructure and services, while the other 6 would represent iwi.  

The Minister’s solution, as set out in her draft Bill, was to expand board membership to have “an equal number of representatives of the territorial authority owners and mana whenua”. This highlights how absurd the whole proposal really is, and how fixated Minister Mahuta is on passing control of water to iwi, since, the South Island’s Entity D, for instance, would have a board of 46 members – 23 representing the 23 councils in the region, with the other 23 members largely representing Ngai Tahu!

So, what did the Three Waters Working Group come up with?  

As could be expected from a group stacked with nine mostly pro-Three Waters Mayors, nine iwi, and terms of reference that prevented any critical examination of the controversial tribal co-governance provisions, many of their 47 recommendations endorsed the Government’s proposal. One suggestion, aimed at giving the appearance that councils still ‘owned’ their water assets, was to issue shares to local authorities based on their populations. Since the shares would carry no voting rights, they would however, be little more than symbolic.

Many of the recommendations were made by iwi, who are clearly determined to make the most of this once in a lifetime opportunity to take over control of the country’s water services and ensure it delivers them the maximum possible benefits. They are calling for the Maori World view of water to be ‘embedded’ in the community and to guide all “decision making, planning, governance, accountability, and service delivery”. They want it all stitched up, so the Maori influence completely dominates the control of water within New Zealand – no doubt setting the scene for a successful claim for the ownership of water itself.

Auckland’s Mayor Phil Goff was the only member of the Working Group to dissent. His minority report states:

“Democratic accountability, through elected representatives, to people who funded the water infrastructure in Auckland valued at many billions of dollars, and who continue to pay for its operation, is critical. It is not appropriate to cede control over this infrastructure to other councils and mana whenua and to remove existing accountability to Aucklanders through elected representatives.”

In a statement condemning Three Waters as a “massive asset grab”, former Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters accused those making ‘co-governance’ demands of abusing ordinary Maori by pretending they will be the beneficiaries, when it’s the iwi elite who will pocket the gains:

“Sadly, the mass majority of ordinary Maori working hard and paying their taxes have been made the stalking horse in these apocalyptic proposals. Like so many other elitist proposals, demands have been made in the name of ordinary Maori whilst the benefits will go straight to a small Maori elite.”

With co-governance set to deliver significant rewards to iwi leaders, they are pushing hard to ensure their ‘partnership’ deceit is embedded in law so the benefits flow in perpetuity. And thanks to the backing of Labour’s fifteen-member Maori Caucus, real progress is being made in elevating iwi rights over the equal rights of all citizens.

This can be seen in Labour’s support for the Canterbury Regional Council (Ngai Tahu Representation) Bill that will give Ngai Tahu two permanent seats on the Council – in addition to the two permanent Ngai Tahu representatives who already sit on the Council to advise it.

As the Ngai Tahu spokeswoman admitted during her oral submission to the Maori Affairs Select Committee, these two new seats are just a start – their goal is 50 percent:

“Our aspiration is eventually co-governance, we are actually talking co-government into the future too. So, we saw this as the first step. If we get this embedded and working well then, we’ve got a model to take it even further in a few years’ time.”

As the largest landowner in the South Island, Ngai Tahu is justifying the establishment of reserved seats as a means of ensuring the “active protection of the rights and interests of Ngai Tahu”. Clearly, these two iwi Councillors will not be looking out for the public good of over 500,000 Cantabrians, only the self-interest of the 15,000 Ngai Tahu who live in the region.   

According to the 2021 Iwi Investment Report prepared by TDB Advisory, Ngai Tahu is by far the country’s richest iwi, worth $1.9 billion. Auckland’s Ngati Whatua Orakei is next at $1.55 billion, followed closely by Waikato-Tainui at $1.52 billion.

The Urewera-based Tuhoe is worth $420 million, the East Cape’s Ngati Porou $286 million, Raukawa in the South Waikato $208 million, Ngati Awa in the Bay of Plenty $180 million, Ngati Pahauwera in the Hawke’s Bay $103 million, and Northland’s Ngapuhi is worth $71 million.

Together, these iwi hold some 58 percent of all post-settlement Treaty assets, which are estimated to be worth around $10.8 billion.

Interestingly, the report also shows that of those nine iwi, which had a combined income last year of over $100 million, five paid no tax. This is as a result of special privileges introduced into the 2005 Charities Act by Helen Clarke’s Labour Government, that allow iwi business development corporations to claim tax-free charitable status.

That Act enables many of the country’s richest tribal business corporations to make little or no contribution to the cost of running of the country.

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator Barry Brill, a former National Party Minister, who is alarmed at how widespread the concept of co-governance has become under Jacinda Ardern’s administration, reminds us of the serious consequences of transferring democratic power to those who are unelected and unaccountable:

“Governance is all about power – which in turn is defined as the ability to control or direct the behaviour of others. If someone has governance over you, they can run your life. If you don’t obey, a group with governance power can have you fined and imprisoned. If you resist, the governing group can lawfully use violence to subdue you and force you to comply. Governance is not something that can be taken lightly.”

That’s why replacing democratic accountability – a system that protects the rights and interests of all citizens – with one that prioritises the rights and interests of a racial minority with ambitions of supremacy, is so dangerous. Yet Jacinda Ardern is using her Parliamentary majority to force through constitutional law changes that will transfer democratic power to the tribal elite giving them control over our lives.

This is not what New Zealanders want.

The speed with which tribal control is being embedded into New Zealand’s legal and regulatory framework is breath-taking. It is already being prioritised throughout the public service. It dominates education, and it will do so in health once the Pae Ora Bill – which is being rushed through Parliament during the Covid crisis when those who should be opposing the proposed racial segregation of our health system are busy saving lives – becomes law.

The only hope of stopping this tribal coup is through widespread opposition of the sort we are seeing for Three Waters. If the public demand an end to co-governance, Jacinda Ardern may abandon – or at least put on hold – her He Puapua agenda to avoid electoral oblivion in 2023.

We can see Labour is already reacting to their declining poll numbers – they know their hold on power is growing more tenuous by the day.

What we need is for public concern over co-governance to start showing up in Labour’s internal polling. Unfortunately, since one of the conditions of access to the Government’s $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund effectively prevents any critical evaluation of ‘co-governance’ by the media, the general public remain largely unaware of the danger.

This means it’s up to us to continue to do what we can to spread the message and inform New Zealanders that Jacinda Ardern has no mandate to replace our colour-blind democracy with a tribal system of totalitarian rule that will deliver public power and wealth to an elite group of iwi business leaders to use for their own enrichment.

This agenda needs to be exposed – and condemned by all Kiwis who still believe in democracy.

Three Waters reform risks privatisation of water…Victoria del la Varis-Woodcock, Kaipara Councillor


2nd June 2022
Three Waters reform risks privatisation of water. No matter how many privatisation checks aim to prevent it, once control of water assets is removed from public ownership (via councils) – privatisation is inevitable.
As proposed this reform will never deliver more affordable water services. Why?
A regional representative group
An economic regulatory body
And the proposed community water boards…
Will all require costly salaries, administration/secretariat & premises to operate from. That’s before any engineer has even begun to fix one pipe in the ground.
Chile’s water crisis stems from water being 95% privatized. Chile’s resources & wealth are controlled by a tiny elite. The country has been plagued by social unrest due to the brutal social/economic inequality.
I wrote a thesis about Chile’s political & economic reality as it is experienced by your average Josephine. In 2015, my research took me to Santiago where I met with women from all walks of life…
to be continued…

((A pier at the dried Aculeo Lake in Paine, in 2019. For decades the lake was one of the main tourist attractions of Santiago’s surroundings.)

1st June 2022

‘Consequences will be dire’: Chile’s water crisis is reaching breaking point

Unprecedented drought makes water a national security issue as more than half of Chile’s 19 million population lived in area with ‘severe water scarcity’ by end of 2021

From the Atacama Desert to Patagonia, a 13-year megadrought is straining Chile’s freshwater resources to breaking point.

By the end of 2021, the fourth driest year on record, more than half of Chile’s 19 million population lived in an area suffering from “severe water scarcity”, and in April an unprecedented water rationing plan was announced for the capital, Santiago.

In hundreds of rural communities in the centre and north of the country, Chileans are forced to rely on emergency tankers to deliver drinking water.

“Water has become a national security issue – it’s that serious,” said Pablo García-Chevesich, a Chilean hydrologist working at the University of Arizona. “It’s the biggest problem facing the country economically, socially and environmentally. If we don’t solve this, then water will be the cause of the next uprising.”

Chile’s water crisis was high on the agenda when, in 2019, millions of protesters took to the streets to demand that the country confront its entrenched inequalities.

Among their demands – which ranged from better pensions to healthcare reform – the slogan “it’s not drought, it’s theft” was a common refrain.

Many called for a rewrite of Chile’s 1981 water code, a relic of Gen Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship (1973-1990) which enshrines one of the most privatised water systems in the world, allowing people to buy and sell water allocations like stocks.

Chile is also the only country in the world that specifically says in its constitution that water rights are treated as private property.

Before his election last year, Gabriel Boric, Chile’s progressive new president, promised a green future for the country, emphasising the protection and restoration of hydrological cycles.

(An abandoned boat at the dried Aculeo Lake in Paine, about 70km south-west of Santiago, Chile, in 2019. )

Boric, 36, signalled his intent by appointing a renowned climate scientist, Maisa Rojas, as his environment minister – but he need not look far for a jarring reminder of the task awaiting him.

Just 50km south of Santiago, Lake Aculeo, once a tourism hotspot, was wiped off the map in less than a decade, disappearing altogether in 2018.

A recent paper, of which García-Chevesich was a co-author, found that the sale of water rights, local population growth and climate change combined to dry the lake out completely.

“I find it really hard to say the ‘former lake’,” said Jenny Caru, 40, a local water activist, as she picked a path across the cracked earth to the centre of the lakebed.

In its heyday in the 1990s, the lake in Aculeo – meaning “where the waters meet” in the Indigenous language Mapudungun – had a floating bar serving holidaymakers and boats traversed the lagoon all summer long.

(Top, people paddling a kayak at the Aculeo Lake in Paine, Chile, on 1 January 2013 and a view of the dried lagoon taken at the same spot on 5 March 2019.)

Now, jetties sit uselessly metres above the dry mud, and slipways trail off into a dusty thatch of dead stems.

Signs declaring it safe to swim ring an empty lakebed, and restaurants and campsites sit dry and abandoned.

“This is where I grew up,” said Caru, “It hurts me that the lake isn’t there any more, that the trees are drying out and the birds are gone.”

In 2010, the rights to the water feeding the lake were legally acquired by large agricultural plantations and private estates, which siphoned off the main tributaries. Valleys around the basin passed from annual crops to summer homes and water-intensive fruit tree plantations.

As the area transitioned from agriculture to tourism and then went into steep decline, locals were forced to find work in the gated holiday communities – or move to Santiago.

“I used to supply all of the markets and communities in the area,” said Alfonso Ortíz, 73, a farmer who once employed several workers to grow watermelons, pumpkins, corn and oranges using water from the lagoon.

“Agriculture here is dead. There’s nothing left,” he said.

Chile’s economy, South America’s largest by per-capita GDP, is built on water-intensive, extractivist industries principally mining, forestry and agriculture.

But its growth has come at a price.

Supported by the private rights system, about 59% of the country’s water resources are dedicated to forestry, despite it making up just 3% of Chile’s GDP.

Another 37% is destined for the agricultural sector, meaning only 2% of Chile’s water is set aside for human consumption.

(In this aerial photo, a pier sits on the dried lake bed of the Aculeo Lagoon in Paine, Chile, on December 2021.)

“If they diverted your river to grow fruit and avocados to sell to foreigners – and now they’re bringing you water in tankers – how would you feel?” asked García-Chevesich . “It’s humiliating and undignified.”

Across central and southern Chile, watersheds are in danger of suffering the same fate as Lake Aculeo.

“There’s a fundamental problem here: the end goal for our water is to make money, not wellbeing for people,” said Caru, who retains hope that the lake will return one day.

But while the need for change is urgent, hope could be on the horizon.

In April, President Boric signed a reform to the 1981 water code that had languished in congress for 11 years. It declares water a public good for human use, and acknowledges climate change as a threat to Chile’s water availability.

Elsewhere, a new draft constitution has been drawn up – the upshot of 2019’s mass protests. It goes even further in revising Chile’s relationship with its resources, stating that water must be protected in all its states and phases, as well as declaring it essential for life and nature.

“Every day in Chile the human right to water is violated,” said Carolina Vilches, who was elected to the country’s constitutional convention in March 2021. “This is why what we have put in the constitution is so fundamental – we need to change how we view our water.”

The draft will be put to a plebiscite on 4 September.

“We need to apply the brakes and take responsibility for all of the errors which have already been committed,” said García-Chevesich. “If not, the consequences will be dire.”

3rd June 2022


Democracy is a very fragile system that depends on parties from left and right agreeing to uphold its laws.

The theft – for that is what it is – of the people’s waters assets, paid for over generations by rates, is an attack on property rights, the meaning of ownership, and strikes at the heart of our democratic system.

We are shortly to have Maori wards deliver representation for Maori, only there won’t be much of a table left to sit around.

(About 100 people turned up to an event in Christchurch to campaign against three waters reforms.)


Click on Link to view video : (Jordan Williams – Tax Payer Union

Campaigners fighting the Government’s plans to reform the nation’s three waters infrastructure took their anger to the steps of Christchurch City Council on Friday as they demanded that ministers hear concerns over the “undemocratic asset grab”.

The city was the first of 36 stops in a nationwide roadshow run by the Taxpayers’ Union to oppose the water reforms.

The Government is pushing through a major revamp of the way water is managed, and plans to transfer control of infrastructure from councils to four new independent entities, which would then be co-governed by councils and iwi.

(Campaigners say the three waters revamp is an attack on democracy)

Taxpayers’ Union executive director Jordan Williams said the tour was being held to hear and highlight the concerns of ratepayers and local councils opposed to the “undemocratic three waters asset grab.”

“We’re meeting local communities that own and have built and have paid for these three water assets, and we’re calling on the government and the select committee to do the same thing,” he said.

About 100 people turned up to the event in Christchurch on Friday, councillor Sam MacDonald – a strong opponent of the reforms – coming out to offer his support and speak to the campaigners.

“For us, it’s $6.9 billion of our assets being taken into entities where we’re going to have no real say,” he said, branding the reforms “an appalling attack on democracy”.

Under the reforms to drinking, stormwater and wastewater infrastructure, one single controlling entity would cover most of the South Island, while there would be three in the north.

It is planned for them to begin operating in July 2024.

The campaign heads to Southland next, where former broadcaster Peter Williams will be a guest speaker for events held in conjunction with Groundswell.

The roadshow campaign will stop at 36 town and cities over the coming weeks.

The roadshow campaign will stop at 36 town and cities over the coming weeks.


26th Sept 2022

A 91.75% majority vote to change Playcentre Aotearoa’s constitution has been overruled by some of the organisation’s roopu (governance bodies), Playcentre insiders have revealed.

One parent, who asked not to be named, said the nationwide vote on Saturday morning was designed to change the parent-led child care education organisation’s constitution to a “trust deed” so — among other issues —  more of the funding it received would go to local playcentres, rather than “98%” going to the administrative body, which operates a bulk-funding model.

In the vote, parents and employees at 366 of 400 playcentres voted yes in favour of change.

However, before any change could come into effect, a separate vote from  the organisation’s roopu needed to be considered.

The organisation’s six roopu are “governance bodies within Playcentre Aotearoa, consisting of whanau Maori, to give whanau Maori an equitable voice in Playcentre governance”, which require at least five of the six roopu to agree in order to achieve a consensus.

Four roopu voted in favour and two against, but  the two-thirds  majority was not enough to carry the change.

One parent said reactions at their local playcentre were of disappointment and disbelief.

“We just couldn’t believe it. It’s supposed to be about the kids.

“There was no explanation given by roopu and a lot of parents were quite upset.”

The results of the vote were circulated by Playcentre’s board in an email later on Saturday.

“We accept that while the overwhelming majority of our people are ready to move forward with this  trust deed, we haven’t yet reached a place where we can all move forward together,” the email said.

Playcentre  Aotearoa has been asked for  comment but its response was not received in time for deadline.

Mady Jessup’s Input :

If I could use CGI to create a video graphic of the tentacles that this government is rapidly infecting this country with, and I had to pick a very simple news issue to use to focus on to demonstrate it – I would pick something like this….

(This is an extract from a NewstalkZB article on the day of the New Zealand Play Centers’ funding vote 2 weeks ago – which very few people knew of/were paying attention to.)

“Final Day of Voting For Playcentres to Have Resources Centralised and Distributed”

It’s the final day of voting for a big decision for playcentres.

They are voting on whether to centralise their resources into one big pot to be controlled and distributed by the National Body a la Three Waters for playcentres.

It will only happen if 80% of centres vote yes to the changes.”….

Well, an overwhelmingly 91.75% of over 400 votes was vetoed by just 2 installed corporate Maori overseers.

Think about that for a second. TWO corporately installed Maori overseers vetoed a major NZ education decision that garnered 91.75% support.

And then consider that this situation is only a tiny glimpse of a system that is being implemented on this country.

These things I’ve become aware of on my journey in the last 2 years are very real and very happening. And we have all been taught to fear talking about it because of the variety of names we will be called for doing so (also not an accident).

The effects that this ‘Co-Governance’ system is going to have on NZ and NZ society will be devastating and irreparable.

The marauders in charge have infiltrated all of our government levels and the only people who are standing up to it are quickly cast aside as conspiracy nut jobs.

By the time any good strong hearts that are left in the media wise up to it, it will be too late.

More Input : That is incredibly disheartening and unbelievable to read. As you point out, that is exactly what is going to happen under three waters and other areas of co governance. Even maori boards on councils are an issue, as they will work the same way. Incidents such as this, highlight the very road we are walking down now, if co governance is to continue and expand its network of invasion in this country, we are all in for a very turbulent and troubled future.

Another Comment :

Where has centralisation worked out for the better?

This is the the government shifting the country to a Socialist setting where the government controls everything and tells you how to live your life.

* He Puapua was not supposed to be made law until 2024. But with Wako Jacko as minister of broadcasting the government has passed part of the He Papua legislation into law without telling anyone.

Why should they? They don’t need to tell anyone, the gender voters gave Ardern an absolute majority. 

So right now councils, and any public boards are sitting to make very important decisions on the future funding and conduct of their organisation’s.  So the board has a vote about the budget being passed. It passes. But due to the  He Puapua legislation must pass through the Maori members of the unelected Council. In the case above ( Aotearoa Playcenters’) report there were two Maori. They voted against the proposition. There for there was a 100% Maori vote against  the proposition, so it was lost.

If one Maori voted yes and one Maori voted no then the greater numbers would have counted. There is only one way for this to pass now. That is to get Maori into a meeting at the marae and offer donations to fit the purpose of the vote. Bribe the horses 

This labour government has legalised corruption into local bodies and any public organisation that uses tax payers money. 

 He Puapua is God now. This is the most dangerous piece of legislation in the western world.

If you need evidenced that Ardern is a Socialist,  don’t look any further than  He Puapua .